....when Pelosi and Schumer file articles asking that President Biden be removed due to non compos mentis and replaced by Kamala Harris. I want January 15, 2022. Closest to the day gets a dinner with Watch Ole.

If there's anything remotely requiring a tie-breaking vote in the Senate, Dems won't push for this.

For the same reason, Republicans will vote for removal if articles were actually filed. They would drag out VP confirmation for the remainder of the term.

Or maybe I'm missing something.

nm. I read your date wrong.

Agree with Jim. We are stuck with Biden until after mid-terms.

Does Brandon know you are gambling with his time?

> Pick a day....

Thread title fail

Let's go Brandon.

Biden and RGB died together years ago.

jimscott85 said:

---

If there's anything remotely requiring a tie-breaking vote in the Senate, Dems won't push for this.

For the same reason, Republicans will vote for removal if articles were actually filed. They would drag out VP confirmation for the remainder of the term.

---

This. Would result in 50-50 deadlock in senate. No VP to break a tie because no VP appointment would be approved by a 50-50 senate in this political climate.

LonghornDub said:

---

....when Pelosi and Schumer file articles asking that President Biden be removed due to non compos mentis and replaced by Kamala Harris. I want January 15, 2022. Closest to the day gets a dinner with Watch Ole.

---

He's gotta be rolling his eyes at all of this "Let's go Brandon" weirdness.

A Thursday

LonghornDub said:

---

....when Pelosi and Schumer file articles asking that President Biden be removed due to non compos mentis and replaced by Kamala Harris. I want January 15, 2022. Closest to the day gets a dinner with Watch Ole.

---

January 26, 2022.

LETS GO (to dinner) BRANDON!

Sea Speed said:

---

Does Brandon know you are gambling with his time?

---

If he won't go, I'll take his place.

LonghornDub said:

---

Sea Speed said:

---

Does Brandon know you are gambling with his time?

---

If he won't go, I'll take his place.

---

So dinner w a sip?

you do realize you didn't sweeten the deal here, right?

Friday February 18, 2022. They want to get past the 1 year anniversary of Biden's fraudulent inauguration for optics so the whole thing look plausible to the uninformed, and so the media can sell the narrative to the American people.

The DNC wants to get past the two year anniversary so Heels-Up can serve (snicker, snicker) 10 years as president, but there is no way Creepy Joe makes it that long.

Let's Go WatchOle!

Gigem_94 said:

---

jimscott85 said:

---

If there's anything remotely requiring a tie-breaking vote in the Senate, Dems won't push for this.

For the same reason, Republicans will vote for removal if articles were actually filed. They would drag out VP confirmation for the remainder of the term.

---

This. Would result in 50-50 deadlock in senate. No VP to break a tie because no VP appointment would be approved by a 50-50 senate in this political climate.

---

I don't think that's how it works.

Quote:

---

Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.

---

The way I read this, EITHER Harris and the majority of the cabinet initiate it, OR the Senate or House initiate it. Once it is initiated, she takes over. Then...

Quote:

---

Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.

---

if Biden's handlers object, he's back in unless they can get 2/3rds of both houses to go along with them. I don't think they can.

91AggieLawyer said:

---

Gigem_94 said:

---

jimscott85 said:

---

If there's anything remotely requiring a tie-breaking vote in the Senate, Dems won't push for this.

For the same reason, Republicans will vote for removal if articles were actually filed. They would drag out VP confirmation for the remainder of the term.

---

This. Would result in 50-50 deadlock in senate. No VP to break a tie because no VP appointment would be approved by a 50-50 senate in this political climate.

---

I don't think that's how it works.

Quote:

---

Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.

---

The way I read this, EITHER Harris and the majority of the cabinet initiate it, OR the Senate or House initiate it. Once it is initiated, she takes over. Then...

Quote:

---

Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.

---

if Biden's handlers object, he's back in unless they can get 2/3rds of both houses to go along with them. I don't think they can.

---

I think you're missing the point. The 50-50 vote and tie-break has nothing to do with the act of getting Harris to replace the Biden in the oval office. The point above is that, if Harris were to transition to "Acting President", there is no VP to break a 50-50 vote in the senate subsequent to that. Harris cannot serve as the tie-breaking vote in the scenario where she is acting or appointed the office of POTUS. President pro tem presides over the senate, but the tie-breaking vote is lost until another VP appointed. With a 50-50 split and no tie-break, you have a bit of a catch 22. You'd NEVER get an appointment of a VP just to yield power BACK to the Dems.

If Dems could ever get Manchin on board, it wouldn't matter if there's no tie-break in the Senate on purely partisan issues.

jimscott85 said:

---

91AggieLawyer said:

---

Gigem_94 said:

---

jimscott85 said:

---

If there's anything remotely requiring a tie-breaking vote in the Senate, Dems won't push for this.

For the same reason, Republicans will vote for removal if articles were actually filed. They would drag out VP confirmation for the remainder of the term.

---

This. Would result in 50-50 deadlock in senate. No VP to break a tie because no VP appointment would be approved by a 50-50 senate in this political climate.

---

I don't think that's how it works.

Quote:

---

Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.

---

The way I read this, EITHER Harris and the majority of the cabinet initiate it, OR the Senate or House initiate it. Once it is initiated, she takes over. Then...

Quote:

---

Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.

---

if Biden's handlers object, he's back in unless they can get 2/3rds of both houses to go along with them. I don't think they can.

---

I think you're missing the point. The 50-50 vote and tie-break has nothing to do with the act of getting Harris to replace the Biden in the oval office. The point above is that, if Harris were to transition to "Acting President", there is no VP to break a 50-50 vote in the senate subsequent to that. Harris cannot serve as the tie-breaking vote in the scenario where she is acting or appointed the office of POTUS. President pro tem presides over the senate, but the tie-breaking vote is lost until another VP appointed. With a 50-50 split and no tie-break, you have a bit of a catch 22. You'd NEVER get an appointment of a VP just to yield power BACK to the Dems.

If Dems could ever get Manchin on board, it wouldn't matter if there's no tie-break in the Senate on purely partisan issues.

---

Regardless MY point is that we're not going to have more than a few hours or maybe a couple of days of "President Harris" (thank God), and there's unlikely to be key Senate votes on anything meaningful during that time anyway. So its a moot point based on an improbable scenario as I pointed out.

I think you're off on your guess by 1 year and one day.

If Potato Brandon officially holds office for 2 years, heels up can take over, claim the Oval Office for the final 2 years of term, then still be eligible for two FULL terms, correct?

Of course, this is assuming that Xiden doesn't kick the bucket before then, and the voting machines are ready to go into quadruple Brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr…..

I've said all along this reminds me of The Manchurian Candidate. Their plan was to prop Joe up for two years, oust him due to some type health/medical issue that makes him unfit to hold the office. Move Kamala up to finish his two years left, then she can run and potentially serve for eight years.

At first blush, it sounds far fetched until you look tha last presidential race. If they can drum up 81K fake votes, what's to stop them drumming a 100K or more next time?

Joe is so hard to listen to, but if we have to listen to Kamala everyday the suicide rate in America will skyrocket.